# Journalistic Ethics Question **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 31, 2008, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408 "2008-10-31T12:25:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/21 "2008-10-31T15:55:39Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > My intuition has been that the reporter should have refrained from reporting it even though no one said “this is off the record,” precisely because it’s clear that if Smith had had reasonable knowledge of the actual situation, he _would_ have either refrained from speaking or gone “off the record.” He would have been neglecting to do his job. You can’t assume something would have been off the record: either it is clearly established as “off the record” (or on background or something else), or it’s on the record. The fact that this is journalistically right overweighs the issue of “real” wrong, in my opinion. In real life, it’s nosy. It’s not so nosy when that’s the job. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/22 "2008-10-31T15:56:27Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > How’s this hit people? If I overhear someone saying “Man I hate that **Frylock** character”\*, where I know the person not only had no idea I was around but indeed had every reason to think I _wasn’t_ around, I don’t think I should hold his comment against him. It hits me as naive and unwise on your part. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/23 "2008-10-31T16:25:48Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The fact that this is journalistically right overweighs the issue of “real” wrong, in my opinion. In real life, it’s nosy. It’s not so nosy when that’s the job. Well, yeah. That’s what I said. -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/24 "2008-10-31T16:26:48Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > It hits me as naive and unwise on your part. Why? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/25 "2008-10-31T16:31:43Z")
Because the evidence is that the dude hates you. Why would you disregard it just because he didn’t know you would hear him? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/26 "2008-10-31T16:41:03Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Because the evidence is that the dude hates you. Why would you disregard it just because he didn’t know you would hear him? I didn’t say I would disregard it. I said I would not hold it against him. Analogously, I’m not saying the Journalist should have disregarded what he heard. I’m just saying he shouldn’t have reported it. (Though see my post above where I give an argument against myself on this point.) -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/27 "2008-10-31T16:46:24Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > I didn’t say I would disregard it. I said I would not hold it against him. 1. What’s the difference? 2. How is this analogous to reporting such a statement? 3. We’re talking ethics here, right? What are the ethics of “holding something against somebody”? An analogous situation would be for you to tell someone else, “I overheard the dude say he hates me.” That’s not unethical, even if you’re not engaging in journalism. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/28 "2008-10-31T16:51:14Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Why? 😕 Confronting him with it would be a bad idea, but ignoring it would not be smart. The distinction you’re making here, both with this analogy and with regard to journalism, really doesn’t make sense. The journalist’s job is to produce a report of what he’s learned. If he doesn’t report what he heard, that’s the same as disregarding it. It’s worth noting here that there are uses for “off the record” information. For example, if someone tells you something valuable and says you can’t print it, you can take it to other sources and get it confirmed elsewhere. That way your first source stays off the record but you have printed and confirmed the information. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/29 "2008-10-31T18:03:03Z")
The flip-side question seems interesting as well: Is Dougherty _obliged_ to report Moyle’s comment? It seems to me that from Dougherty’s point of view, the practical analysis is largely the same as if there had been prior agreement to be off the record. In either case, the reporter has to consider, “if I print this comment that I’ve been asked not to print, my source may stop talking to me.” (Certainly, if there’s a previous agreement, that ups the ante, but the basic analysis doesn’t change.) So can Dougherty legitimately opt not to print Moyle’s and Smith’s remarks, even if he deems them newsworthy? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/30 "2008-10-31T18:20:40Z")
You do a cost-benefit analysis in that case, and it involves some personal knowledge of your source. Again, I want to note that “you didn’t hear that” isn’t the same as “that’s off the record.” Depending on what the source is like as a person, it could mean anything from “we’re through if you print that” to “I know you’re going to print that and I wish you hadn’t heard it.” If Smith is a regular and reliable source, you may not want to alienate her. If you’ve never seen her before and probably never will again, that’s not such a big concern. I don’t mean to suggest journalists are heartless, but it’s _not_ a requirement that every source who ever worked with you is going to be happy with you and what you wrote. The argument for not printing sounds pretty weak, in this case. The topic of the article is voter registrations in the county and how they’ve shifted dramatically. A lawsuit challenging those registration is important, and you can see Dougherty put it in his fifth paragraph. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/31 "2008-10-31T19:55:10Z")
I think it’s also noteable that Dougherty _reported_ that he was asked (after the fact) not to report what he’d heard. ---
**Author:** ![Dosipede](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dosipede](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dosipede)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2008, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408/32 "2008-10-31T22:01:59Z")
As a reporter, what’s said in front of me is fair game. A source can request to go off the record – before the fact, as said above – but there is no guarantee that that information won’t see the front page. The reporter will often use what the first source gave to formulate questions to other sources. This is usually the reason for giving off-the-record information, in my experience. It is bad form to insinuate yourself into a news story. He could have just said that the conversation took place, and then thrown in Moyle’s later comments. Reporting that it was asked to be off the record is also (imho) bad form. It is unnecessary unless the story is about a coverup (which I didn’t see in this story), and it exposes the reporter’s bias. It seems like an intentional dig, and the reporter may have burned a bridge that was still worthy of repair. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/journalistic-ethics-question/470408.md?page=1)